Archived Change To Pvp.

This suggestion has been archived / closed and can no longer be voted on.
JeanLucMontou

JeanLucMontou

High Lord of the Order of Eclipse
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
42
Reaction score
35
Points
0
Age
31
In a recent discussion, I've found that most people disagreeing with the subject were in fact those who raided for no reason and liked it easy. The problem is that as factional PvP is now (raids and wars and random killing) there is absolutely no fun in it. There is no political PvP. And if there is it's far and few between the senseless foolery that kids call "battle" nowadays.
My notation of the current situation is that all burden is placed upon the defender, when in truth and reality, it should very well be placed upon the attackers. If you have any military experience (U.S. Army Infantry of the 101st Airborne Air Assault myself) then you know that in reality, it sucks to be the attacker or on the move away from base at all. You're exhausted and even though you have eaten a single half-ass meal and had a two hour nap in the past 3 or 4 days, you need to think and have a clear mind.
The 30% reduction in damage while on your own faction territory mad SENSE. If it can't be 30% then make it 25 or 20. But my point is, it made sense that the home team got the advantage because the away team was tired from traveling and huffing it to the fight. In medieval times, it was probably beyond triple the amount of effort and suffering.
Here, we have enderpearls. The sole way that people surpass defenses. It's part of the game and I understand it, but the way things are now, there is no burden on the attacking force like their should be.

My solution is simple. Please bring back some form of "home team buff".
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
This suggestion has been closed. Votes are no longer accepted.
20% Damage resistance in territory, maybe even 15 to me personally.
I've got an extra 6 hearts from traits being Absorption and health boost, if I went in to defend it would be decently hard to kill me if I was even half decently armed.
 
I believe that @thor5648 did a video showing how long it took to kill someone with the 30% home buff, a resistance pot, and a trait build focusing on reducing damage. Without fighting back, I believed he survived long enough that he didn't die, but rather stopped, due to his armor durability getting too low. The 30% buff, and really any buff more than 5-10% can make someone who knows what they are doing nearly invincible.
 
Anybody with 30% and a few health pots can be a god. Go raid a half decent faction and see for yourself. Sure raiding should be a challenge, but this is too far.
 
Increased cooldown timer for enderpearls on enemy territory would be an easy fix to make sure that the defending faction can survive longer and use their base more to gain an advantage.

Other than that I can't think of a better balancing idea.
Something to remember though, the defending faction can make use of the environment more since they know it better. Make use of traps, portals, vantage points, hidden piston doors, cannons, dispensers and so on. Something I have noticed is that if you plan your faction right, you will have atleast one safezone that enemies won't be willing to enter more than once.

(If I only had @gridiron1024 's video of my canonball rain to place here)
 
Let me just take those claims of yours, @JeanLucMontou, and examine them.

  • As factional PvP is now (raids and wars and random killing) there is absolutely no fun in it.
Please don't include opinions in your argument. Unless you actually want this to be an advertisement.
  • There is no political PvP. + if there is it's far and few between the senseless foolery that kids call "battle" nowadays.
First is, as far as I know, true. I have yet to see two enemies dish out debates at one another until only the morally correct person remains standing.
Second is hard to understand, but I think you might possibly be trying to disprove your own argument if I read it correctly.
  • all burden is placed upon the defender, when in truth and reality, it should very well be placed upon the attackers.
I've talked to some people, and they've told me the exact opposite thing. I think that if you and they can't compromise, then a burden should be placed on both of you.
  • If you have any military experience (U.S. Army Infantry of the 101st Airborne Air Assault myself) then you know...
Comparing apples to oranges, or more precisely, mountains to mole hills.
  • it sucks to be the attacker or on the move away from base at all.
I can see how this would suck for a person in the army, but a person making the declaration of war could care less.
  • You're exhausted
No I'm not. (J.K. that's what happens when you put personal pronouns in an argument.)
  • it made sense that the home team got the advantage because the away team was too tired from traveling and huffing it to the fight.
I thought this too once, but it turned out the opponents had the Hulk on their team.
  • In medieval times, it was probably beyond triple the amount of effort and suffering.
This is easily my most favorite part of your argument that makes me want to hug you. But instead I'm going to refer you to the crusades which is the perfect piece of evidence for this claim.
  • Here, we have enderpearls. The sole way that people surpass defenses. It's part of the game and I understand it,
Apparently this is the only part of the game you understand since it's the only time you mention vanilla minecraft mechanics.
  • there is no burden on the attacking force like their should be.
I wanted to make a joke here, but I'm too dissapointed by that opinion to be able to.
  • My solution is simple.
-laughs in hysterics.-

A 4/10 argument. Needs better evidence.


Before you ask or respond to this post, it is not in any way an argument. I wanted to try something different, so I felt criticizing was a good alternative to arguing. If you think my comments are a bit too mocking or harsh, I only acted that way to stay in character. Critiques are known for being heartless demons, which may explain why I'm so good at acting like one. Since I didn't take this seriously, you shouldn't either.
I hope that this issue gets sorted out though. I would hate there to be more arguments similar to this in the future.
 
Last edited:
There was a time when PVP was a bit more political. It's when every faction had their fair share of PVPers, and could actually have a fighting force to counter raids. Now the most prominent fighters are consolidated to two-three factions, leaving all the rest of the active factions on the server with a joke of a defensive fighting force. When there were more PVPers spread out into other factions, those factions at least had something to bargain with, which was whether or not they would launch a counter attack. Most factions being raided these days get attacked, either attempt to defend or hide, and then that's the end. Very rarely does Magnanimus get a counter raid against it unless it's someone like Raptum...

Simply put, active factions need to have more people training to fight, if they want to have something to bargain with, which is the threat of a raid or counter raid. Then the diplomatic debates can come along...
 
Alj23 said:
There was a time when PVP was a bit more political. It's when every faction had their fair share of PVPers, and could actually have a fighting force to counter raids. Now the most prominent fighters are consolidated to two-three factions, leaving all the rest of the active factions on the server with a joke of a defensive fighting force. When there were more PVPers spread out into other factions, those factions at least had something to bargain with, which was whether or not they would launch a counter attack. Most factions being raided these days get attacked, either attempt to defend or hide, and then that's the end. Very rarely does Magnanimus get a counter raid against it unless it's someone like Raptum...

Simply put, active factions need to have more people training to fight, if they want to have something to bargain with, which is the threat of a raid or counter raid. Then the diplomatic debates can come along...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm not sure how far back you are talking about but in my opinion a lot of this happened when people started getting godarmors and enchanted axes. It still continued to some degree but not at all as it had before.
 
XvW said:
I'm not sure how far back you are talking about but in my opinion a lot of this happened when people started getting godarmors and enchanted axes. It still continued to some degree but not at all as it had before.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
More so when a faction named Thaelyn was around, Alamut was still active and so was Valyria. Magnanimus had been around for a few months, but the Solaris war hadn't kicked up yet.
 
A lot of good points and arguments. Some more precise and constructive than others. I stand with my experience of the military that being a defender is easier than being an attacker. Attackers irl should and do have the burden. Let's not water down medieval combat in massivecraft as well by pretending (or by ignorance of combat) that traveling invaders don't have it tenfold harder than the defenders.
While I agree it shouldn't be 30%, it should be either a 15-20% buff in either damage or a reduction in damage taken for the defenders. It only makes sense in a real situation. Then again, there may not be any other players seeking as much emersion as possible in a block-world.
 
JeanLucMontou said:
A lot of good points and arguments. Some more precise and constructive than others. I stand with my experience of the military that being a defender is easier than being an attacker. Attackers irl should and do have the burden. Let's not water down medieval combat in massivecraft as well by pretending (or by ignorance of combat) that traveling invaders don't have it tenfold harder than the defenders.
While I agree it shouldn't be 30%, it should be either a 15-20% buff in either damage or a reduction in damage taken for the defenders. It only makes sense in a real situation. Then again, there may not be any other players seeking as much emersion as possible in a block-world.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The defenders also already have an advantage of just needing to f home and bam. Back in the fight if they are smart.

Attackers? Running through bases to get back, grabbing extra pots, grabbing more weapons. They have to run back. It may not be much but it counts.

Also, if you want immersion into a medieval server, then maybe one where people can't fly in water, and lava, and fire fireballs and jump any height and not even get hurt might be a better choice...
 
Terrariauk said:
The defenders also already have an advantage of just needing to f home and bam. Back in the fight if they are smart.

Attackers? Running through bases to get back, grabbing extra pots, grabbing more weapons. They have to run back. It may not be much but it counts.

Also, if you want immersion into a medieval server, then maybe one where people can't fly in water, and lava, and fire fireballs and jump any height and not even get hurt might be a better choice...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

But whether you zoom through water or lava, or throw fireballs, or sprint faster than any other, you expend energy and the away team should still face the challenge of overcoming that energy expenditure.
And I don't suppose you've ever heard of a raid portal? They exist "If you're smart".
 
JeanLucMontou said:
But whether you zoom through water or lava, or throw fireballs, or sprint faster than any other, you expend energy and the away team should still face the challenge of overcoming that energy expenditure.
And I don't suppose you've ever heard of a raid portal? They exist "If you're smart".
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

If you spite rate me one more time.

Yes, but a raid portal is normally not straight into someones base, or into the fight is it?
 
Terrariauk said:
He is just rating everything i do disagree with no reason other than spite. 0.0

Some of them make sense, but most don't.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It isn't spite. I don't agree with you. I can disagree with you all I want. And since when is it impossible to disagree with an opinion?
 
JeanLucMontou said:
It isn't spite. I don't agree with you. I can disagree with you all I want. And since when is it impossible to disagree with an opinion?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

So its an opinion that some people like to pvp?

@Wannag do you like to pvp?

In fact @anyone do you like to pvp? If someone says yes, your rating really is invalid.
 
You can't invalidate me disagreeing anything. Regardless. This isn't the subject. Please keep from straying too much from the original discussion.
 
@JeanLucMontou You know giving the same person negative/neutral ratings on all their posts in a thread is rating abuse, which is against the rules, right?
 
The issue as I see it is that all of the PvPers are bundled up into a handful of obsenely powerful PvP factions. In order to catch up with these factions that do nothing but PvP, an RP faction must discard their normal gameplay and turn into full-time PvPers, grinding in darkrooms, and building traps. People claim that it's easy for someone to level up their stats, but few PvPers factor in the sheer boredom that roleplayers feel when they are in a darkroom doing nothing but clicking and walking. Boredom makes grinding stats so frustraitingly dull that most RPers just give up on it entirely and resort to hiding in their house and complaining on the forums.

What I feel needs to be done is that the PvP factions need to disperse their members across a large number of smaller, weaker, Roleplay-oriented factions. These factions would go to war with one another and thus the PvPers could still enjoy their PvP, while at the same time the RPers have some defense against random raids. It would also, I think, encourage RPers to PvP more and PvPers to RP more, helping the communities blend together a bit.

That said, I don't expect much to come of this. I've more or less given up on reconciling the PvP and RP communities.
 
You can't please everyone with ideas for Pvp, a group always dislikes it and usually no one can present something well thought out enough that everyone likes it. For me ideal Pvp would be bloodlust and old regen potions, but so many people dislike both of those things that it is bound to never happen. Changes in Pvp come when either something is too OP or Minecraft itself changes something. The only time in all my time on the server I've seen a change to Pvp based on someone actually putting together a well organized argument was when @spectec did traits. He included advantages everyone liked. If you feel something should change and everyone can benefit from it go make a document that is well organized and has pros and cons etc. I advise you to first ask around people with different opinions on the forums, some people I see actively voicing their opinions are @Ha5h @gridiron1024 @Mecharic and @nray93 . They all have different unique opinions that voice the different styles of play in MassiveCraft, if you have a suggestion I advise you to see what those four think^^ and if you can get all of them to agree on a compromise on it then take to the forums. Also usually these kind of very broad suggestion threads don't go very far, instead of asking what others think, give a well rounded opinion that everyone will like, ask those four, if you can get them all to agree then go ahead and see what everyone else thinks. Do it!
 
JeanLucMontou said:
It isn't spite. I don't agree with you. I can disagree with you all I want. And since when is it impossible to disagree with an opinion?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Care to point out the part of the following post you found disagreeable?

Terrariauk said:
Speak for yourself. For me it's lost it's flair, but I know loads of people who enjoy it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I haven´t found any disagreeable part in it (from my perspective, feel free tough to explain yours).
"Speak for yourself" . (no disagreeable part here)
"For me it´s lost it´s flair,". (wouldn´t make much sense for you to disagree with the statement of his own feelings)
"I know loads of people who enjoy it" (this part could maybe be disagreed with if you think he is lying, but otherwise rather not)

Should you choose to NOT explain the first disagree, I would like you to remove the rating on the post as without any visible reason it looks like rating abuse.

Terrariauk said:
@JeanLucMontou YOU LITERALLY CANNOT DISAGREE WITH THAT. PEOPLE DO FIND IT FUN. REMOVE. THE. RATING.

@Ha5h
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
This statement however can be disagreed with (disagreement about the ability to disagree).

One last note: Im gonna ask Rank3 to clean up the off topic (discussing the ratings) posts from this thread. Edit: As soon the one question about wheter the first disagree is legit or not is answered.
 
nray93 said:
Care to point out the part of the following post you found disagreeable?



I haven´t found any disagreeable part in it (from my perspective, feel free tough to explain yours).
"Speak for yourself" . (no disagreeable part here)
"For me it´s lost it´s flair,". (wouldn´t make much sense for you to disagree with the statement of his own feelings)
"I know loads of people who enjoy it" (this part could maybe be disagreed with if you think he is lying, but otherwise rather not)

Should you choose to NOT explain the first disagree, I would like you to remove the rating on the post as without any visible reason it looks like rating abuse.


This statement however can be disagreed with (disagreement about the ability to disagree).

One last note: Im gonna ask Rank3 to clean up the off topic (discussing the ratings) posts from this thread. Edit: As soon the one question about wheter the first disagree is legit or not is answered.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Wait, hang on. If you just said I was right about the first one, how can he disagree with the next?
 
I was really interested in responding to this thread, it seemed like a nice way to start a friendly intellectual debate. But I kept scrolling down and I only see what in essence is a flame war.

Can't we all just get along?

(Nobody, out.)
 
nray93 said:
Care to point out the part of the following post you found disagreeable?



I haven´t found any disagreeable part in it (from my perspective, feel free tough to explain yours).
"Speak for yourself" . (no disagreeable part here)
"For me it´s lost it´s flair,". (wouldn´t make much sense for you to disagree with the statement of his own feelings)
"I know loads of people who enjoy it" (this part could maybe be disagreed with if you think he is lying, but otherwise rather not)

Should you choose to NOT explain the first disagree, I would like you to remove the rating on the post as without any visible reason it looks like rating abuse.


This statement however can be disagreed with (disagreement about the ability to disagree).

One last note: Im gonna ask Rank3 to clean up the off topic (discussing the ratings) posts from this thread. Edit: As soon the one question about wheter the first disagree is legit or not is answered.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You have no idea why I disagreed. I disagreed with how he stated it. He stated exactly what I said. Obviously people like pvp or it wouldn't exist. My point in disagreeing was that I don't believe people should like meaningless pvp. Am I not allowed to disagree with an opinion opposing my own?
 
JeanLucMontou said:
You have no idea why I disagreed. I disagreed with how he stated it. He stated exactly what I said. Obviously people like pvp or it wouldn't exist. My point in disagreeing was that I don't believe people should like meaningless pvp. Am I not allowed to disagree with an opinion opposing my own?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Not when you have to twist the opinion, no.
 
Regardless of any off topic conversations or points,

65.2% want there to be more of a burden on attackers.
4% want there to be more burden on defenders.
And 30.6% want more political elements involved.
People feel that attackers are too strong.
 
JeanLucMontou said:
Regardless of any off topic conversations or points,

65.2% want there to be more of a burden on attackers.
4% want there to be more burden on defenders.
And 30.6% want more political elements involved.
People feel that attackers are too strong.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Multiple things have to be taken into account.

Sample size, 23 people have voted. That is not representative of the entire of massive.

There is no option for remaining the same, or for less political PVP, or both having a burden.

Also, those who have voted are most likely people who heavily use the forums, so high tier RPers or PVPers. Not the in betweens, those who play casually, or those who don't use the forums.

So, to summarise the statistics, 15 people think attackers are too strong.

And to think I got a d in general studies...
 
Last edited:
JeanLucMontou said:
Regardless of any off topic conversations or points,

65.2% want there to be more of a burden on attackers.
4% want there to be more burden on defenders.
And 30.6% want more political elements involved.
People feel that attackers are too strong.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You forget that I want a burden placed on both attackers and defenders. Your poll wouldn't let me vote for that.
 
Terrariauk said:
Multiple things have to be taken into account.

Sample size, 23 people have voted. That is not representative of the entire of massive.

There is no option for remaining the same, or for less political PVP.

Also, those who have voted are most likely people who heavily use the forums, so high tier RPers or PVPers. Not the in betweens, those who play casually, or those who don't use the forums.

So, to summarise the statistics, 15 people think attackers are too strong.

And to think I got a d in general studies...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The only thing factual in your reply was the math. But you are right, I should have put an option for staying the same. Must have slipped my mind. I do plan on having an official page for this once the discussions I'm having sum up. I plan on having atleast one aspect of pvp changed. It's displeasing for a lot of people as is.
 
JeanLucMontou said:
The only thing factual in your reply was the math. But you are right, I should have put an option for staying the same. Must have slipped my mind. I do plan on having an official page for this once the discussions I'm having sum up. I plan on having atleast one aspect of pvp changed. It's displeasing for a lot of people as is.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It's not down to you, it's down the community and ultimately the staff.

Everything above was factual, the sample size is not representing, I learnt all about that stuff in AS research methods for Psychology. It can be applied to all studies and surveys.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Rowet
[Aug 29, 2024] In the Name of Change: Blind Speed-Dating
Replies
0
Views
202
Events
Rowet
Rowet
Slayer1618x
  • Locked
Remus Open Pvp Tournament (january 28th)
Replies
0
Views
2K
Faction Announcements
Slayer1618x
Slayer1618x
justhattie
A Change Of Heart
Replies
1
Views
513
Regalian Roleplay
Apictos
Apictos
S
Adapting Existing Characters To The Lore?
Replies
4
Views
171
General
SevenBirds
SevenBirds
DedJok
Change In Leadership Proclamation
Replies
3
Views
825
Regalian Roleplay
SneakyLinguine
SneakyLinguine
Top Bottom